Chris West <debian@fau.xxx>

Applying for Debian Maintainer
Applicant Chris West <debian@fau.xxx>, currently Debian Maintainer
OpenPGP fingerprint408A E4F1 4EA7 33EF 1265 82C1 B195 E1C4 779B A9B2
Activity timespan2017-09-11 to 2017-10-31
Status Closed. RT ticket: 6949.
Completed 2017-10-31
Advocate lamby
Debian account name faux
Missing requirements none
Requirements ok Declaration of intent SC/DFSG/DMUP agreement Advocate Key consistency checks

Requirements

Requirement Approved by Approved date Notes
Declaration of intent nm@debian.org 2017-09-11
SC/DFSG/DMUP agreement nm@debian.org 2017-09-11
Advocate nm@debian.org 2017-09-11
Key consistency checks noodles 2017-09-25
(download all signed statements in a single mailbox file)

Log

Date Author Requirement Action Content Public
2017-09-11 13:40 faux - - Process created yes
2017-09-11 14:08 faux Declaration of intent add_statement Added a new statement yes
2017-09-11 14:08 nm@debian.org Declaration of intent req_approve New statement received, the requirement seems satisfied yes
2017-09-11 14:09 faux SC/DFSG/DMUP agreement add_statement Added a new statement yes
2017-09-11 14:09 nm@debian.org SC/DFSG/DMUP agreement req_approve New statement received, the requirement seems satisfied yes
2017-09-11 14:41 nm@debian.org Advocate req_approve New statement received, the requirement seems satisfied yes
2017-09-11 14:41 lamby Advocate add_statement Added a new statement yes
2017-09-16 12:05 noodles Key consistency checks - While this key technically meets the requirements I'm curious as to why it doesn't have the email address used for the application as a UID, and also about the wisdom of a .xxx domain for a primary email address in terms of systems reliably accepting it? yes
2017-09-17 20:13 faux Key consistency checks - I am unconcerned about the email address used; [many things]@goeswhere.com, [many things]@fau.xxx are all identical (they all arrive at the same mailbox; they all have exactly the same DNS and mailserver config). This is the main reason I haven't added extra uids to the key, they mostly exist to reduce the clarity of usage of the key. "If you wish to contact me via. gmail, use one. If you wish to contact me otherwise, use the other." (which does not go through a 3rd party). I have had no issues with the .xxx domain being used as a novelty for email, although I have heard rumours (not personally) of corporate networks that block .xxx for websites. I had not considered that this might be an issue for Debian. I will accept a change of account email to gpg, goeswhere.com, if that makes everything easier, but I feel that the loss of clarity is harmful there. yes
2017-09-25 21:24 noodles Key consistency checks req_approve I'm not worried about the Debian infrastructure (though I can't comment on the email setup there), but email interactions as part of Debian tend to involve non-Debian email systems even when it's between DDs, and I'd worry about the risk that people would treat .xxx as more likely originating spam. Something to be aware of, I feel. I still think that the email address you're planning to use for your primary Debian work should really be on the key, but not enough to hold up approving the keycheck. yes
2017-10-29 13:31 noodles - proc_freeze Process frozen for review yes
2017-10-29 13:31 noodles - proc_approve Process approved yes
2017-10-29 13:31 noodles - proc_unapprove Process unapproved yes
2017-10-29 13:31 noodles - proc_approve Process approved yes
2017-10-31 00:40 gwolf - done Closed from keyring changelog a833b77c648cf92caed64b92a4a297d28e2586c4, RT #6949 yes